Post navigation

Atheism doubles among Generation Z

For Gen Z, “atheist” is no longer a dirty word: The percentage of teens who identify as such is double that of the general population (13% vs. 6% of all adults). The proportion that identifies as Christian likewise drops from generation to generation. Three out of four Boomers are Protestant or Catholic Christians (75%), while just three in five 13- to 18-year-olds say they are some kind of Christian (59%).

This was particularly interesting…

Teens, along with young adults, are more likely than older Americans to say the problem of evil and suffering is a deal breaker for them.

…as was this:

Nearly half of teens, on par with Millennials, say “I need factual evidence to support my beliefs” (46%)—which helps to explain their uneasiness with the relationship between science and the Bible. Significantly fewer teens and young adults (28% and 25%) than Gen X and Boomers (36% and 45%) see the two as complementary.

I don’t think that non-believers have any business criticizing religious beliefs as such. Non-believers have a right to criticize religious beliefs only when believers are drawing upon their religious beliefs in order to justify public laws and policies that non-believers are also obliged to follow (including, as noted above, protected legal status attaching to religious communities).

There’s no mistaking the intent behind that extreme position, and it’s the same motivation behind your silly attempt to reclassify religious beliefs as “non-assertoric”.

Kantian Naturalist: I’m very sorry if my remark provoked your ire — I was being ironic. I know you cannot see my tongue or my cheeks, but please note that my remark was intended with the former firmly in the latter.

Robin: You make a lot authoritative claims and bluster about your god and Christianity and truth, but it is obvious you really don’t know much about anything you claim.

I read the link you provided and I don’t find anything that suggests that “Van Til believed his god specifically created most of humanity for death and torture.”

Hell is not torture it’s the just punishment for sin. People aren’t sent to hell because God forced them to go there to be tortured against their will. People go to hell because they reject God and do evil things.

Here is a relevant quote from the link you yourself provided

quote:

So God actively chooses whom to condemn, but because he knows they will have a sinful nature, the way he foreordains them is to simply let them be – this is sometimes called “preterition.” Therefore, this foreordination to wrath is passive in nature (unlike God’s active predestination of his elect where he needs to overcome their sinful nature).

end quote:

Calvinists believe that God supernaturally and irresistibly changes the nature of the elect so that they love God more than their sin and simply leaves the rest of humanity alone to face the consequences of their choices.

I would think you would support the idea of God not messing with your nature and instead just letting you be and treating you with justice.

here is the money quote from the link you provided

quote;
Calvinists hold that even if their scheme is characterized as a form of determinism, it is one which insists upon the free agency and moral responsibility of the individual.
end quote;

fifthmonarchyman: I read the link you provided and I don’t find anything that suggests that “Van Til believed his god specifically created most of humanity for death and torture.”

John Calvin held a view on predestination sometimes referred to as “double predestination.” This is the view that God has actively chosen some people for damnation as well as for salvation.

Your refusal to accept what is true is not my problem.

Hell is not torture it’s the just punishment for sin. People aren’t sent to hell because God forced them to go there to be tortured against their will. People go to hell because they reject God and do evil things.

See, there is no way I could possibly trust this claim as being remotely accurate. You’ve already demonstrated you either have trouble actually reading what is written and understanding what people like Calvin actually mean, or that you willing dismiss what is actually written and substitute what you think you wish it said instead. Either way, you’re understanding is demonstrably false. Couple that with the fact that you don’t actually know what hell is. You have no actual idea, just speculations and musings based on your…wait for it…misreadings and erroneous understandings of various texts – that, I might add, it appears you cherry pick to support something you believe must be true. There’s nothing about your assessment or claims in this matter that gives me any kind of confidence.

Here is a relevant quote from the link you yourself provided

No, it’s not. The one I provided is.

Calvinists believe that God supernaturally and irresistibly changes the nature of the elect so that they love God more than their sin and simply leaves the rest of humanity alone to face the consequences of their choices.

God like us in having thoughts and feelings.
God is omniscient and omnipotent.
God is outside time.
God acts.
We have free will and are rewarded or punighed as befits our actions.
God hardens hearts of some and opens others.
Thoughts, beliefs and desires can be as sinful as deeds.
Resisting temptation is noble.

Damnation is not torture it’s simply justice for crimes committed and death is not the reason that the reprobate were created it’s simply the wages of sin.

Fifth, at this point, your particular commentary isn’t helpful. I don’t trust your assessment. Again, you don’t actually know a thing about hell or damnation or anything similar. For all you actually know (or, at least can demonstrate), there is no such thing as either.

But the actual point here is not your interpretation, but what John Calvin actually states and what Van Til supported about Calvin. Calvin held that his god created most humans for death and torture. You can try to weasel that into something more benign sounding, but the fact is, that’s what Calvin stated. And Van Til supported such silliness. Don’t like it? Take it up with them.

Perhaps your lack of interest explains your error in understanding what other people believe

peace

Perhaps your vested interest explains your error in understanding what other people believe.